Bridging the gap between research and agile practice: an evolutionary model

There is wide acceptance in the software engineering field that industry and research can gain significantly from each other and there have been several initiatives to encourage collaboration between the two. However there are some often-quoted challenges in this kind of collaboration. For example, that the timescales of research and practice are incompatible, that research is not seen as relevant for practice, and that research demands a different kind of rigour than practice supports. These are complex challenges that are not always easy to overcome. Since the beginning of 2013 we have been using an approach designed to address some of these challenges and to bridge the gap between research and practice, specifically in the agile software development arena. So far we have collaborated successfully with three partners and have investigated three practitioner-driven challenges with agile. The model of collaboration that we adopted has evolved with the lessons learned in the first two collaborations and been modified for the third. In this paper we introduce the collaboration model, discuss how it addresses the collaboration challenges between research and practice and how it has evolved, and describe the lessons learned from our experience

Achieving Marketplace Agility Through Human Resource Scalability

[Excerpt] Increasingly, firms find themselves, either by circumstances or choice, operating in highly turbulent business environments. For them, competitiveness is a constantly moving target. Many, it appears, are satisfied to enjoin the struggle with patched up business models and warmed over bureaucracies. But some, convinced that this is a losing proposition, are aggressively exploring and even experimenting with alternative frameworks and approaches. The monikers are many -- kinetic (Fradette and Michaud, 1998), dynamic (Peterson and Mannix, 2003), resilient (Hamel and Valikangas, 2003) and our favorite, agile (Shafer, Dyer, Kilty, Ericksen and Amos, 2001) -- but the aim is the same: to create organizations where change is the natural state of affairs. Clearly, this quest poses a number of major challenges for our field (Dyer and Shafer, 1999, 2003), one of which, optimizing human resource scalability, is the subject of this essay

The Importance of Conflict Resolution Techniques in Autonomous Agile Teams

Today, software companies usually organize their work in teams. Social science research on team development has shown that for a team to reach a productive and autonomous stage, it has to be able to manage internal conflicts and disagreements efficiently. To better facilitate the team development process, we argue that software engineers' needs additional training in negotiation skills and conflict resolution. In this position paper, we outline ideas for what aspects to consider in such training. As an example, we argue that a majority of the conflicts originate from team-level factors and that they, therefore, should be managed on the team-level instead of in relation to dyads.Comment: Accepted at 1st International Workshop on Autonomous Teams (A-TEAMS), 201

A framework for understanding the factors influencing pair programming success

Pair programming is one of the more controversial aspects of several Agile system development methods, in particular eXtreme Programming (XP). Various studies have assessed factors that either drive the success or suggest advantages (and disadvantages) of pair programming. In this exploratory study the literature on pair programming is examined and factors distilled. These factors are then compared and contrasted with those discovered in our recent Delphi study of pair programming. Gallis et al. (2003) have proposed an initial framework aimed at providing a comprehensive identification of the major factors impacting team programming situations including pair programming. However, this study demonstrates that the framework should be extended to include an additional category of factors that relate to organizational matters. These factors will be further refined, and used to develop and empirically evaluate a conceptual model of pair programming (success)

Carving out new business models in a small company through contextual ambidexterity: the case of a sustainable company

Business model innovation (BMI) and organizational ambidexterity have been pointed out as mechanisms for companies achieving sustainability. However, especially considering small and medium enterprises (SMEs), there is a lack of studies demonstrating how to combine these mechanisms. Tackling such a gap, this study seeks to understand how SMEs can ambidextrously manage BMI. Our aim is to provide a practical artifact, accessible to SMEs, to operationalize BMI through organizational ambidexterity. To this end, we conducted our study under the design science research to, first, build an artifact for operationalizing contextual ambidexterity for business model innovation. Then, we used an in-depth case study with a vegan fashion small e-commerce to evaluate the practical outcomes of the artifact. Our findings show that the company improves its business model while, at the same time, designs a new business model and monetizes it. Thus, our approach was able to take the first steps in the direction of operationalizing contextual ambidexterity for business model innovation in small and medium enterprises, democratizing the concept. We contribute to theory by connecting different literature strands and to practice by creating an artifact to assist managemen

Requirements Engineering for Globally Distributed Teams using Scaled Agile Framework

As large organizations are striving to deliver software at a faster pace and to keep up with the latest trends, they are in a transformation stage of adopting to Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe). SAFe is a framework for implementing agile practices at enterprise level and it provides a roadmap for portfolios, programs and teams. Large organizations adopting to SAFe are facing challenges in coordinating, planning and managing requirements, as they work with globally distributed teams. The goal of this thesis was to improve the Requirements Engineering (RE) process using Scaled Agile Framework in globally distributed teams. The main research method used in this thesis was action research, an iterative approach which combines theory and practice. The empirical study was conducted in a large project that used SAFe and had eight globally distributed teams. In order to investigate the challenges faced by globally distributed teams, analysis of the existing literature and RE process flow in SAFe was important. It served as a good input to understand which good RE practices can be applied in the empirical study. The results of the study show that visually representing requirements as models and sharing domain and system knowledge through Community of Practice (CoP) reduced ambiguity in requirements. The good RE practice applied in SAFe, of working and improving collaboratively with the globally distributed teams helped in better coordination and managing of requirements. In addition to this, it was also essential to have SAFe training to develop clear and shared understanding of the framework and RE process. The lessons learned from the empirical study indicate that a well-organized PI planning is the key RE practice of SAFe in providing the big picture of requirements to all members in distributed teams. In addition, Community of Practice (CoP) can be a key RE practice of SAFe in sharing knowledge such as business domain, system knowledge, skills and techniques, and experiences

Bringing templates to life: overcoming obstacles to the organizational implementation of Agile methods

Agile software development methods have become accepted as a template for organizations to create new products. Though generally viewed as an aid to productivity, there are a number of barriers to experiencing their full benefit. One such barrier pertains to the implementation of agile methods across the range of organizational levels from the use of tools to culture, norms, and policies creating the context within which projects are performed. This essay examines in detail the experiences of one expert at integrating agile technique, approach, and philosophy into the broader organizational setting. Numerous particular lessons and prescriptions result from this discussion. Turning around the grounded theory approach where numerous individuals are interrogated mildly in regard to a particular phenomenon, the discussion surfaced in this paper results from repeated interviews with one domain expert. Lessons and comments are organized into four sections: individual team member, organization, transitioning, and tools and techniques